The Bishop Challenge

  • 376 Replies
  • 54367 Views
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #180 on: January 06, 2020, 11:02:35 AM »
Moonbounce aka EME has been done by amateur radio enthusiasts since the mid 60s.  With the advent of new digital software and modes you an do this with as little as 10W ,as shown on the Essex Ham website that Assad the main topic was to prove the distance to the moon using radio, not only does this hobby prove the distance but also goes to prove the speed of light as without the speed being a constant 299792458m/s both on and off the earth no antenna would resonate at its fundamental frequency.ergo the speed of light is correct as is the 384,400km to the moon, pretty simple really.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17563
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #181 on: January 06, 2020, 11:04:25 AM »
Moonbounce aka EME has been done by amateur radio enthusiasts since the mid 60s.  With the advent of new digital software and modes you an do this with as little as 10W ,as shown on the Essex Ham website that Assad the main topic was to prove the distance to the moon using radio, not only does this hobby prove the distance but also goes to prove the speed of light as without the speed being a constant 299792458m/s both on and off the earth no antenna would resonate at its fundamental frequency.ergo the speed of light is correct as is the 384,400km to the moon, pretty simple really.
Why is the moon 384,000km away? Because of the speed of light.
What is the speed of light? It is the speed necessary for emr to reach the moon such that its distance is measured 384,000km away.

I thought you scientific types abhorred circular logic?

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #182 on: January 06, 2020, 12:08:44 PM »
Well, all you need do is go to a location near a tall object, say twenty to thirty feet tall. Thing is, knowledge of exactly how tall that object is needed.

Next, position yourself so the top of that abject barely obscures the moon and mark the time of observation.

Next, measure the baseline distance between you and the object.

Then, find out where the position of the moon was at the time of observation.

Voila, you are able to measure the altitude of the moon.
And doing this with the assumption that Earth is flat gives you multiple different answers depending upon location.
But it does have the big problem of figuring out how far away the point the moon is above.

A better way would be to use tape measure.
No, using a tape measure to measure the distance would be one of the worst methods for such a long distance.

But a tape measure is not the only way to measure distance.
There are plenty of other ways.
Even using a tape measure is not a direct measurement. You still use sight or some other method to line it up.

Why is the moon 384,000km away? Because of the speed of light.
Speed of light, size of Earth's shadow or parallax

What is the speed of light? It is the speed necessary for emr to reach the moon such that its distance is measured 384,000km away.
I thought you scientific types abhorred circular logic?
Good thing it ins't circular at all.
You pretending it is circular doesn't magically make it so.

The speed of light can be directly measured on Earth. We don't need the moon to measure it.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #183 on: January 06, 2020, 12:14:50 PM »
A better way would be to use tape measure. Not one of these methods directly measures distance. That is how laughable these claims are. You have not shown that any of these methods actually measure distance and do so accurately. No one has. The astronomer has as much as an idea of distance to the heavenly bodies as a mortician who has never seen a cadaver has expertise in his profession.
Are you saying that indirect measurements can't be accurate and reliable?  ???
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #184 on: January 06, 2020, 12:19:42 PM »
Moonbounce aka EME has been done by amateur radio enthusiasts since the mid 60s.  With the advent of new digital software and modes you an do this with as little as 10W ,as shown on the Essex Ham website that Assad the main topic was to prove the distance to the moon using radio, not only does this hobby prove the distance but also goes to prove the speed of light as without the speed being a constant 299792458m/s both on and off the earth no antenna would resonate at its fundamental frequency.ergo the speed of light is correct as is the 384,400km to the moon, pretty simple really.
Why is the moon 384,000km away? Because of the speed of light.
What is the speed of light? It is the speed necessary for emr to reach the moon such that its distance is measured 384,000km away.

I thought you scientific types abhorred circular logic?
Yes, which is why that isn't how the speed of light is measured.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #185 on: January 06, 2020, 12:53:55 PM »
Why is the moon (about) 384,000km away?
What a weird question. One might as well ask "Why is the equator about 6215 miles from the North Pole?" Or "Why is a duck" for that matter!

Quote from: John Davis
Because of the speed of light.
No, the Moon is not (about) 384,000km away "because of the speed of light". The Moon is "(about) 384,000km away" because that is where it is!

Quote from: John Davis
What is the speed of light? It is the speed necessary for emr to reach the moon such that its distance is measured 384,000km away.
The speed of light has never been determined as "speed necessary for emr to reach the moon" by anyone seriously measuring the speed of light.
"Michelson's refinement of the Foucault experiment" gave a value of "299,796±4 km/s was only about 4 km/s higher than the current accepted value".
And the Moon never came into it! Would you like some references to confirm that?

Quote from: John Davis
I thought you scientific types abhorred circular logic?
It seems that your thoughts are not very logical then but I always knew that real flat-Earthers abhorred logic, mathematics and science.

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #186 on: January 06, 2020, 02:28:27 PM »
Possibly it’s time for a recap.
There are five ways that I know off that single private individuals or groups can use to measure the distance to the moon:
Parallax
Using a lunar eclipse
Radio bounce
Meridian crossing
Occultations
Institutions with appropriate tech can also use:
Radar
Lasers

There is a huge amount of detailed information on-line explaining how each of the above methods work as well as many examples if you so require it. The interesting thing is regardless of the method used the answer will always be in the same ballpark bearing in mind some methods will have greater room for error. From a scientific standpoint that is pretty significant as different methods used on the same problem all yielding more or less the same answer point to that answer being correct.
It’s also worth noting that measuring the distance to the moon has a long history of over 2000 years.
It was stated by John Davis that a flat earth Zetetic council, members unknown, calculated the distance to be much much smaller, exact method used and actual answer obtained are unknown, perhaps he can share this information. This is very weak evidence to say the least and it strikes me that on the balance of probability given the wealth of available data that the accepted distance of 384,400 km is correct.  As Mr. Bishop has been unable to provide any details of the FE method used or exact calculated value obtained leads me to conclude that he has lost this challenge.



None of these methods have been verified independently and shown to accurately show said distance is correct. The calculations can be done by any school child, and have been done again and again over the past at least 3,000 years. Review Earth: Not A Globe.
There is no doubt about the current methods of measurement. maybe you could describe a better one here, not referring to past documents.
A better way would be to use tape measure. Not one of these methods directly measures distance. That is how laughable these claims are. You have not shown that any of these methods actually measure distance and do so accurately. No one has. The astronomer has as much as an idea of distance to the heavenly bodies as a mortician who has never seen a cadaver has expertise in his profession.

As a prolific flat earth scientist could you provide links to all your papers that show how all the methods I listed that have been used to calculate/find the distance to the moon are in your words laughable? Im assuming you do have rock-solid verifiable data that can be corroborated by others, as it’s quite a claim you make.
I have to say I’m a bit suspicious as you mentioned on another part of the forum that there were a number of flat earth astronomers. I’ve tried looking for them and their publications but have drawn a blank. Even one of your Mods tried a search but he just turned up a bunch of bum links. For you to refute all the methods listed above you would have to have done some serious science using some serious equipment. Possibly when you publish all this work you can tell us all where your scientific research facility is.
It’s also odd that all the other non flat earth astronomers in the world, that’s all of them not just some,  would not agree with your statement that pointed to all the above methods being laughable.
While you are at it what method would you use for calculating the moons size and distance. It would be good to know as Tom Bishop was very reluctant to share his.
Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #187 on: January 06, 2020, 06:59:52 PM »
Possibly it’s time for a recap.
There are five ways that I know off that single private individuals or groups can use to measure the distance to the moon:
Parallax
Using a lunar eclipse
Radio bounce
Meridian crossing
Occultations
Institutions with appropriate tech can also use:
Radar
Lasers

There is a huge amount of detailed information on-line explaining how each of the above methods work as well as many examples if you so require it. The interesting thing is regardless of the method used the answer will always be in the same ballpark bearing in mind some methods will have greater room for error. From a scientific standpoint that is pretty significant as different methods used on the same problem all yielding more or less the same answer point to that answer being correct.
It’s also worth noting that measuring the distance to the moon has a long history of over 2000 years.
It was stated by John Davis that a flat earth Zetetic council, members unknown, calculated the distance to be much much smaller, exact method used and actual answer obtained are unknown, perhaps he can share this information. This is very weak evidence to say the least and it strikes me that on the balance of probability given the wealth of available data that the accepted distance of 384,400 km is correct.  As Mr. Bishop has been unable to provide any details of the FE method used or exact calculated value obtained leads me to conclude that he has lost this challenge.

None of these methods have been verified independently and shown to accurately show said distance is correct. The calculations can be done by any school child, and have been done again and again over the past at least 3,000 years. Review Earth: Not A Globe.
Really? Would you care to show where exactly in "Earth: Not A Globe" Rowbotham shows "calculations can be done by any school child, and have been done again and again over the past at least 3,000 years".

I'll eagerly await your reply.

By the way, Rowbotham did write this about the "THE TRUE DISTANCE OF THE SUN" and "all the visible luminaries in the firmament."
Quote from: Samuel Birley Rowbotham
Zetetic Astronomy, Earth is Not a Globe
CHAPTER V.
THE TRUE DISTANCE OF THE SUN.
IT is now demonstrated that the earth is a plane, and therefore the distance of the sun may be readily and most accurately ascertained by the simplest possible process. The operation is one in plane trigonometry, which admits of no uncertainty and requires no modification or allowance for probable influences.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[iIf any allowance is to be made for refraction--which, no doubt, exists where the sun's rays have to pass through a medium, the atmosphere, which gradually increases in density as it approaches the earth's surface--it will considerably diminish the above-named distance of the sun; ]so that it is perfectly safe to affirm that the under edge of the sun is considerably less than 700 statute miles above the earth.[/i]

The above method of measuring distances applies equally to the moon and stars; and it is easy to demonstrate, to place it beyond the possibility of error, so long as assumed premises are excluded, that the moon is nearer to the earth than the sun, and that all the visible luminaries in the firmament are contained within a vertical distance of 1000 statute miles.


So, Rowbotham claims that "under edge of the sun is considerably less than 700 statute miles above the earth, and that all the visible luminaries in the firmament are contained within a vertical distance of 1000 statute miles.

Yet both this and the "other society" claim this:
Quote from: The Flat Earth Society Wiki
The Sun
The sun is a sphere. It has a diameter of 32 miles and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.
And this:
Quote from:  The Flat Earth Society Wiki
The Moon
The moon is a sphere. It has a diameter of 32 miles and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.
Please explain!

And you dare criticise astronomers with regard to the distance of the Moon from the Earth!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #188 on: January 06, 2020, 07:18:42 PM »
Possibly it’s time for a recap.
There are five ways that I know off that single private individuals or groups can use to measure the distance to the moon:
Parallax
Using a lunar eclipse
Radio bounce
Meridian crossing
Occultations
Institutions with appropriate tech can also use:
Radar
Lasers
None of these methods have been verified independently and shown to accurately show said distance is correct.
Really? Try again!

Just look at the history of the "Distance to the Moon".

The distance to the moon has been known to a reasonable accuracy for millennia.
Quote
Aristarchus around 270 BC derived the Moon's distance from the duration of a lunar eclipse (Hipparchus later found an independent method).
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
From this Aristarchus obtained
                                          Rmoon's orbit/rearth ~ 60
which fits the average distance of the Moon accepted today, 60 Earth radii or about 382,260 km..

From The Moon's Distance--1
That 60 Earth radii is about 382,300 km.

Quote
Hipparchus (probably in 129 BC), whose calculations produced a result of 59-67 R. This method later found its way into the work of Ptolemy, who produced a result of 64 1/6 R at its farthest point.
Note that R is the radius of the earth.
And the result of 59-67 R ranges from 375,900 km to 426,900 km straddles the current value.
But it should be noted that the distance to the moon varies from 356,500 km at the perigee to 406,700 km at apogee - maybe Hipparchus wasn't so far out.

Quote
An expedition by French astronomer A.C.D Crommelin observed meridional transits of the Moon (the moment when the Moon crosses an imaginary great circle that passes directly overhead and through the poles) on the same night from two different locations. Careful measurements from 1905 through 1910 measured the angle of elevation at the moment when a specific lunar crater (Mösting A) crossed the meridian, from stations at Greenwich and at Cape of Good Hope, which share nearly the same longitude. A distance was calculated with an uncertainty of ± 30 km, and remained the definitive lunar distance value for the next half century.

Quote
Astronomers O'Keefe and Anderson calculated the lunar distance by observing 4 occultations from 9 locations in 1952. They calculated a mean distance of 384407.6±4.7 km, however the value was refined by in 1962 by Irene Fischer, who incorporated updated geodetic data to produce a value of 384403.7±2 km.

Now, of course, we have radar and laser measurements to greater precision.

That indirect measurements dating back 2290 years put your flat Earth guesses to shame!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #189 on: January 06, 2020, 10:22:49 PM »
A better way would be to use (a) tape measure. Not one of these methods directly measures distance.
Why then don't geodetic surveyors use tape measures to measure long distances on earth?
The distance across the United States is comparable to the flat-Earthers claim for the distance to the Moon.
But those surveyors used triangulation.

When the French surveyors and astronomers measured the length of part of the meridian through Paris why didn't they "use (a) tape measure"?
For some reason, they carefully measured one of more base-lines, essentially with tape-measures and then used triangulation.

Well, that is exactly what astronomers do wherever possible.

Quote from: John Davis
That is how laughable these claims are. You have not shown that any of these methods actually measure distance and do so accurately. No one has.
Nobody can, at present, "use (a) tape measure" to measure distances of thousands of kilometers, even on Earth so how would you suggest that these distances might be measured?

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #190 on: January 07, 2020, 01:33:31 AM »
A better way would be to use tape measure. Not one of these methods directly measures distance. That is how laughable these claims are. You have not shown that any of these methods actually measure distance and do so accurately. No one has. The astronomer has as much as an idea of distance to the heavenly bodies as a mortician who has never seen a cadaver has expertise in his profession.

It seems no figure can be decided on. Sometimes they say it's 363,104km and other times 405,696 km. So all we are really given is a guess. Guesses aren't fact

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #191 on: January 07, 2020, 03:20:05 AM »
A better way would be to use tape measure. Not one of these methods directly measures distance. That is how laughable these claims are. You have not shown that any of these methods actually measure distance and do so accurately. No one has. The astronomer has as much as an idea of distance to the heavenly bodies as a mortician who has never seen a cadaver has expertise in his profession.

It seems no figure can be decided on. Sometimes they say it's 363,104km and other times 405,696 km. So all we are really given is a guess. Guesses aren't fact
No, "Guesses aren't fact" so why are you doing nothing but guessing? Surely, though, you jest.

One who claims to "know everything" must know that those are not guesses but, as I stated, are the perigee and apogee distances of the elliptical Lunar orbit.

But, I guess I'll humour you with this extra information.
Quote
The Inconstant Moon
The following table shows larger images of perigean and apogean full Moons, with details of the position of the Moon at the moment the pictures were taken. 
Views from Mill Valley, CA, USA, 37°54' N 122°32' W; all times UTC

                        Perigee
Date/time: 1987 August 10 08:00
Moon:
          Age: 15 Days, 19 Hours
          Phase: 98%
          Full: 1987 August 9 10:18
          Perigee: 1987 August 8 19:00, 357643 km
Geocentric:
          Distance: 359861 km
Topocentric:
          Distance: 359000 km
          Angle subtended: 0.5548°
         
                        Apogee
Date/time: 1988 February 2 06:00
Moon:
          Age: 14 Days, 5 Hours
          Phase: 99%
          Full: 1988 February 2 20:52
          Apogee: 1988 February 3 10:00, 406395 km
Geocentric:
          Distance: 405948 km
Topocentric:
          Distance: 404510 km
          Angle subtended: 0.4923°
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The mean distance to the moon, 384401 km, is the semimajor axis of its elliptical orbit. The closest perigee in the years 1750 through 2125 was 356375 km on 4th January 1912; the most distant apogee in the same period will be 406720 km on 3rd February 2125 (have your camera ready!).
And the exact perigee and apogee distances depend slightly on the Sun and the positions of the other planets.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #192 on: January 07, 2020, 04:01:53 AM »
blah blah yadda yadda

Can you look outside and tell me right now what the distance to the moon is in km? Or will you just use some average? You could be many thousands of km off. That matters when you are trying to spout facts

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #193 on: January 07, 2020, 04:36:59 AM »
Dude, there is such a thing as actual blue moons.

Yes, and they are due to dust particles in the atmosphere, not refraction.
The Rarest Blue Moon

A Moon that actually looks blue, however, is a very rare sight. The Moon, full or any other phase, can appear blue when the atmosphere is filled with dust or smoke particles of a certain size: slightly wider than 900 nm. The particles scatter the red light, making the Moon appear blue. This is known as Mie scattering and can happen for instance after a dust storm, a forest fire, or a volcanic eruption.

Eruptions like the ones on Mt. Krakatoa in Indonesia (1883), El Chichon in Mexico (1983), on Mt. St. Helens in the US (1980), and Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines (1991) are all known to have made the moon look blue. Some people even suggest the term once in a Blue Moon is based on these rare occasions, rather than the Full Moon definitions above.
You are stating dust particles do not refract light?
I'm stating that there is a difference between diffraction and refraction that you may not be aware of.
https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/waves/Lesson-3/Reflection,-Refraction,-and-Diffraction
Okay...a direct question.

Can dust particles suspended in the atmolayer of earth refract light?

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #194 on: January 07, 2020, 06:59:29 AM »
blah blah yadda yadda

Can you look outside and tell me right now what the distance to the moon is in km? Or will you just use some average? You could be many thousands of km off. That matters when you are trying to spout facts

You basically you have an option either you ask John Davis with his trusty tape measure or you could contact these chaps:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment

In the end, it depends on who or what you wish to believe. I plum for the science guys as regardless of the option used and who does the calculations (see above methods) all the answers end up in the same ballpark. Due to the moon's orbit the distance does of course vary. but a good general figure is 384,000 km.

Really…..what a laugh!!!

Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #195 on: January 07, 2020, 07:01:21 AM »
I would say no to refraction as light needs to pass through a medium to be refracted.

Dust particle are excellent at scattering light though. Hence you cannot see very well through haze or fog. The mean particle size is large compared to the wavelength of visible light, hence the photons are scattered readily.  Infra-red and radio waves are less affected.

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #196 on: January 07, 2020, 07:05:40 AM »
Dude, there is such a thing as actual blue moons.

Yes, and they are due to dust particles in the atmosphere, not refraction.
The Rarest Blue Moon

A Moon that actually looks blue, however, is a very rare sight. The Moon, full or any other phase, can appear blue when the atmosphere is filled with dust or smoke particles of a certain size: slightly wider than 900 nm. The particles scatter the red light, making the Moon appear blue. This is known as Mie scattering and can happen for instance after a dust storm, a forest fire, or a volcanic eruption.

Eruptions like the ones on Mt. Krakatoa in Indonesia (1883), El Chichon in Mexico (1983), on Mt. St. Helens in the US (1980), and Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines (1991) are all known to have made the moon look blue. Some people even suggest the term once in a Blue Moon is based on these rare occasions, rather than the Full Moon definitions above.
You are stating dust particles do not refract light?
I'm stating that there is a difference between diffraction and refraction that you may not be aware of.
https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/waves/Lesson-3/Reflection,-Refraction,-and-Diffraction
Okay...a direct question.

Can dust particles suspended in the atmolayer of earth refract light?

What is the 'atmolayer', it's not a term I'm familiar with and neither is any science reference book.
Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #197 on: January 07, 2020, 07:06:36 AM »
but a good general figure is 384,000 km.
General figure?

Doesn't sound very 'sciencey' for someone who claims to love science

If the figure is in a continued state of flux, then tell me where it's at at the time of writing.

You think people went on the Moon and pranced around like clowns? (and maybe taking a wizz on it) Did they assume a distance for the fuel load? "Oh its generally 384,000km away, fuel up for that"

I think not. A tape measure would be best however I find the damn metal ones bend and go floppy for any distance over 2m or so. So even a tape measure is a crappy tool

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #198 on: January 07, 2020, 07:09:59 AM »
Fuck math. How does it work?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Yes

  • 604
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #199 on: January 07, 2020, 08:34:50 AM »
General figure?

Doesn't sound very 'sciencey' for someone who claims to love science
Okay, everybody, raise your hand if you understand what perigee and apogee are.  You're allowed to google it first.

If the figure is in a continued state of flux, then tell me where it's at at the time of writing.
No really, you're allowed to google it.  https://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/moon/distance.html
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #200 on: January 07, 2020, 08:46:44 AM »
General figure?

Doesn't sound very 'sciencey' for someone who claims to love science
Okay, everybody, raise your hand if you understand what perigee and apogee are.  You're allowed to google it first.

If the figure is in a continued state of flux, then tell me where it's at at the time of writing.
No really, you're allowed to google it.  https://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/moon/distance.html

That link is not helpful. It doesn't tell me the distance to the km right this second. It is always changing yes? So any answer you give is technically incorrect. You cant just give an 'average' +/- 21296km. You could be wrong by that many km. More than half the circumference of the Earth!


Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

Yes

  • 604
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #201 on: January 07, 2020, 08:56:43 AM »
So any answer you give is technically incorrect.
Oh, so you just asked a stupid question.  My bad, I thought you were looking for information.
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #202 on: January 07, 2020, 08:59:54 AM »
So any answer you give is technically incorrect.
Oh, so you just asked a stupid question.  My bad, I thought you were looking for information.

I was.

How do you determine the distance of the moon in real time and if it's simple, why doesn't anyone do it and simply parrot a figure which could be wrong by allegedly as much as 21296km

Even in a globe world that level of error should be a tough pill to swallow

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #203 on: January 07, 2020, 09:11:40 AM »
So any answer you give is technically incorrect.
Oh, so you just asked a stupid question.  My bad, I thought you were looking for information.
You've not met Shifter before then?
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

Yes

  • 604
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #204 on: January 07, 2020, 09:26:24 AM »
You've not met Shifter before then?
I just like highlighting his aggressive ignorance.

How do you determine the distance of the moon in real time
If you want precise real time, you'll probably want lasers or at least radar.  But if you'd actually like to do it yourself, give this a shot:  https://www.universetoday.com/91120/do-it-yourself-guide-to-measuring-the-moons-distance/

(Don't worry, we all know you won't.)
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #205 on: January 07, 2020, 09:32:18 AM »
You've not met Shifter before then?
I just like highlighting his aggressive ignorance.
There was nothing aggressive about asking an honest question in measuring the distance to an object (in this case the Moon) in real time. I find your responses however to be needlessly condescending

How do you determine the distance of the moon in real time
If you want precise real time, you'll probably want lasers or at least radar.  But if you'd actually like to do it yourself, give this a shot:  https://www.universetoday.com/91120/do-it-yourself-guide-to-measuring-the-moons-distance/

(Don't worry, we all know you won't.)

Why do you think I wont?

Are you happy to assume the moon is 'roughly' 384,000km all the time? Aren't you the least bit curious to what the real distance is every time you look at it?

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

Yes

  • 604
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #206 on: January 07, 2020, 10:12:04 AM »
I find your responses however to be needlessly condescending
Prepare yourself.

Why do you think I wont?
Because you are aggressively ignorant.  A trivial Google search could provide you with more information than you'd have the attention span to read.  Instead, you ask us here to Google it for you.  Pathetic.

Are you happy to assume the moon is 'roughly' 384,000km all the time? Aren't you the least bit curious to what the real distance is every time you look at it?
I assume every moment I am not staring at the moon, it loses its inertia and begins an immediate plummet towards Hyrule.  But I know a guy.  He fixes it up every three days or so.
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #207 on: January 07, 2020, 10:26:42 AM »
I find your responses however to be needlessly condescending
Prepare yourself.

Why do you think I wont?
Because you are aggressively ignorant.  A trivial Google search could provide you with more information than you'd have the attention span to read.  Instead, you ask us here to Google it for you.  Pathetic.
Do you often answer peoples questions like this? Calling them pathetic because they could just use Google to find an answer? And you call others aggressive!! Perhaps you are looking in the mirror when you say it so. You should calm down.

For your information, I was asking, not for me, but for posterity. To have an answer to a question in this thread that is true and proper. Not some BS lazy '384000km away' answer. So sick of people parroting lazy and incorrect answers. You can find a lot of wrong informaytion of Google too. If you want to use 384,000km People should at least attach a +/- 21296km to reflect the moon distances at its perigee and apogee. Agree?

Are you happy to assume the moon is 'roughly' 384,000km all the time? Aren't you the least bit curious to what the real distance is every time you look at it?
I assume every moment I am not staring at the moon, it loses its inertia and begins an immediate plummet towards Hyrule.  But I know a guy.  He fixes it up every three days or so.

Nonsense

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

Yes

  • 604
Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #208 on: January 07, 2020, 10:43:03 AM »
It seems no figure can be decided on. Sometimes they say it's 363,104km and other times 405,696 km. So all we are really given is a guess. Guesses aren't fact
If you want to use 384,000km People should at least attach a +/- 21296km to reflect the moon distances at its perigee and apogee. Agree?

Whenever you get called out for being a pedantic ignoramus, you retreat back to established knowledge and act defensive.  You're such a troll.
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

Re: The Bishop Challenge
« Reply #209 on: January 07, 2020, 11:05:33 AM »
Moonbounce aka EME has been done by amateur radio enthusiasts since the mid 60s.  With the advent of new digital software and modes you an do this with as little as 10W ,as shown on the Essex Ham website that Assad the main topic was to prove the distance to the moon using radio, not only does this hobby prove the distance but also goes to prove the speed of light as without the speed being a constant 299792458m/s both on and off the earth no antenna would resonate at its fundamental frequency.ergo the speed of light is correct as is the 384,400km to the moon, pretty simple really.
Why is the moon 384,000km away? Because of the speed of light.
What is the speed of light? It is the speed necessary for emr to reach the moon such that its distance is measured 384,000km away.

I thought you scientific types abhorred circular logic?
do you have a low cost laser measure that uses the speed of light?